YAY!!

[mrgreenthumb]

send me a pm' date=' i guess i dont understand. i am unsure who you are referring to and why. a little explanation wouldn't hurt anyone.[/quote']

 

i totally agree!!! if you gonna take the time to say that you may as well just come right out and say who or what you are talking about rather than beating around the bush about it.

[downhill_biker]

look i agree with you it is not his place to restrict our right to bear arms! I do enjoy shooting and owing guns always have! I do care if my rights get taken away. Its just thats not what is most important to me. For me thats not what i choose to worry about. No need to provide links i'm sure he did vote against the things they said' date=' i'm just saying that you have to read through alot of bs and muck to get the actual facts from sites like that, and that sites like that exist on both side of it. You have to take the good with the bad, imho i think obama will make a better president, somtimes i have to look at the bigger picture, and what would be best for the country as well as myself. I'm not saying you don't have a valid point, just that i don't understand why that would be a deciding factor one way or the other. You talk about statistics and odds, both of which are in my favor that i will live my enitre life without ever having to use my gun, so i guess if it was taken away it really wouldn't make a difference, other than that peace of mind and the ability to hunt my own food. Its never an even match if someone is breaking into your home, they have the element of surprise. All the guns in the world wouldn't help me if i was killed in my sleep. Do you see my point? There are just as many pointless scenarios where you would loose if you had a gun, compared to the same scenarios if you had none. If someone is already set on robbing you, they already have the advantage, you don't even know when or how or where. I can make an educated guess and say that i will never be a victim based on odds and statistics. If i was robbed, or burglarized, and i had a gun, and i shot the person, wouldn't i still be a victim? Guns are great, but they don't solve the problem as to why the person is breaking into your house, to fuel his drug habit! Why not focus on solving that problem, rather than worrying about something that hasn't happened or is even the works. Just because we don't agree with one of his opinions, does not discredit the fact that he was the best man for the job! I guess my question is do your really think mccain would of made a better president?[/quote']

 

we wont know if mccain would have been better, because he is way to old to be up for it next time around. (laugh)

 

i agree...there is so much worthless bs out there especially about the candidates. it is hard to see what is fact or fiction, so for the most part i dont listen to those "facts". i personally think that obama is incredibly smart. he really knows what he is doing, and has the confidence that this country needs. i hope that things turn around a little with the new president.

 

now...what i dont like is the electoral vote. why not just use popular vote, this is crazy. i cant believe they are still doing this. makes me want to vote in states that are on the verge, so my vote actually counts. can someone explain why this is a good system, or are we all agreed that it should be popular vote?

[mrgreenthumb]

we wont know if mccain would have been better, because he is way to old to be up for it next time around. (laugh)

 

i agree...there is so much worthless bs out there especially about the candidates. it is hard to see what is fact or fiction, so for the most part i dont listen to those "facts". i personally think that obama is incredibly smart. he really knows what he is doing, and has the confidence that this country needs. i hope that things turn around a little with the new president.

 

now...what i dont like is the electoral vote. why not just use popular vote, this is crazy. i cant believe they are still doing this. makes me want to vote in states that are on the verge, so my vote actually counts. can someone explain why this is a good system, or are we all agreed that it should be popular vote?

 

To be honest, i'm not 100% sure how the electoral vote even works, i mean i have a basic understanding, but it boggles my mind how they can announce who is gonna be president before all of the ballots are even counted!!!! Just doesn't seem right. Who are these people anyways?

[downhill_biker]

To be honest' date=' i'm not 100% sure how the electoral vote even works, i mean i have a basic understanding, but it boggles my mind how they can announce who is gonna be president before all of the ballots are even counted!!!! Just doesn't seem right. Who are these people anyways?[/quote']

 

well as far as i understand,

 

there are so many electoral votes per state based on pop.

 

if the state is 5:2 for obama, and the state has 4 votes, it will most likely, but doesnt have to go 3:1 that just increased the margin for obama.

 

when they get to 170? i think? electoral votes, that is over half and there is no way for a come back. even if many states aren't in...if the other states already voted and have high pop./high electorals, its over. so say a state with 100k for obama and 10k for mccain, and they have 3 electorals, mccain 0: obama 3

 

basically that 10k people didn't even get their votes counted, as well as the states that hadn't even counted ballots. it isn't right, and should be changed.

[mrgreenthumb]

but what i don't understand is how they know that the state is 5:2 for obama, who decidedes that? who is actually placing the electoral vote? I undertand each state is given a certain amount based on population and that it takes 270 electoral votes to win, i just don't understand who is actually placing those electoral votes. And what they base their votes off of.......agreed it should be popular!!!

[Lowman]

in my understanding, each state has a set amount of electorial votes, based on the population of that state, when a candidate wins the majority vote of the populus, said candidate is awarded all the electorial votes from that state.

 

The electorial college needs to be revised, In 2000, Al Gore won the popular vote but Bush won the key states that gave him the electorial votes to win the election. Crazy how that works.

[R-3]

Okay guys here is goes. Im gonna keep it short and sweet. What I meant by "It is amazing the fallacies people believe and the ignorance that is still bred in this country. It is truly sad, truly" is that how people are into these doomsday prophecies. Obama hasn't spent one day in office and everyone is already a expert on how he will run everything. They know every in and out! How can people be so down on a guy after what we have went through the last 8 years. It is unexplainable. Peoples views are so distorted and ****ed up its crazy. To think we will have no guns, Rap will be the only music, blacks will get all the jobs, have hitler at the helm, become socialists, turn muslim, and invite terrorists to dinner is a absolute load of crap. Believe me there are more but I will stop with those.

 

Thanks for the clarification Bob. Way to pay attention! Do some homework guys If you are gonna talk politics know your stuff. Electoral college????? Obama won by over 7 million in the popular! Later Ryan

 

PS- I could go on but the opposing are not gonna change their mind so why bother. It's like taking first place in a sh$t tossing contest.

[SULLY]

I base my info on the facts. I am in the firearm industry so it is a little different for me. Those of us in the firearm industry have to watch this stuff closely because it affects our livelyhood. As far as the rest of the man's agenda, I don't know. It would be great if he can do what he says he can do. But I also know that nothing comes for free. And I don't look down on him because he is Democrat. I don't care which side wins. All I care is they do the job at hand and try to look out for the peoples best interest in a whole.

[R-3]

I base my info on the facts. I am in the firearm industry so it is a little different for me. Those of us in the firearm industry have to watch this stuff closely because it affects our livelyhood. As far as the rest of the man's agenda' date=' I don't know. It would be great if he can do what he says he can do. But I also know that nothing comes for free. And I don't look down on him because he is Democrat. I don't care which side wins. All I care is they do the job at hand and try to look out for the peoples best interest in a whole.[/quote']

 

Yes it is totally different when you are involved in the industry that is under fire. (sorry for the pun) I think guns are safe. There might be some restrictions that are coming down but some in the past have done good. Obama is here to try to fix something, not just win a presidency. He has brought this country together already in so many ways its amazing. Lets give him our approval till he doesn't deserve it anymore. Let his actions speak not assumptions.

 

All I say is give him a chance. Like Senator McCain said "We need to come together as a country, not as segregated parties" It really cannot get much worse than what is already going on. If anyone disagrees with that I wanna hear it

[mrgreenthumb]

i totally agree!!

 

what about this merkley smith battle CRAZY!!!! first merkley, then smith now merkley ahead by 2500 and 76 percent counted, gonna be a close one!!! Stuff like this make politics alot more interesting!!!

[downhill_biker]

Thanks for the clarification Bob. Way to pay attention! Do some homework guys If you are gonna talk politics know your stuff. Electoral college????? Obama won by over 7 million in the popular! Later Ryan

 

I know he won by popular vote, and that is what is right, what isn't is all the people's vote that didn't even count. I agree that I may not understand politics too well, but that is why I am trying to discuss it here. I want to become more educated. Either way the electoral vote needs to be GONE> completely.

[R-3]

I know he won by popular vote, and that is what is right, what isn't is all the people's vote that didn't even count. I agree that I may not understand politics too well, but that is why I am trying to discuss it here. I want to become more educated. Either way the electoral vote needs to be GONE> completely.

 

Who's vote didnt count? I don't understand? Later Ryan

[180Bob]

Each state gets a number of electors equal to the number of its members in the US House of Representatives plus one for each of its two US Senators.

 

The District of Columbia gets three electors. While state laws determine how electors are chosen, they are generally selected by political party committees within the states.

 

This way there is somewhat of a balance between the large populace states and the smaller states. Just like the balance between the Senate where each state gets two senators and the House where representation is based on the states populartion

[JeffP]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWZHTJsR4Bc

 

People who thought Palin was a good choice should check this out... lmfao.

[R-3]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWZHTJsR4Bc

 

People who thought Palin was a good choice should check this out... lmfao.

 

Not surprising. She was just brought in to get the disenfranchised Hillary voters. Go Caribou Barbie

[180Bob]

Unfortunately Impur' date=' you just proved my point. You have no clue as to what is going on with the 2nd in the constitution. We came VERY close a few months back to having that 2nd changed. Don't kid yourself. The govt. can do whatever they want! As far as homes being broke into, believe me when I tell you there is alot more things going on other then just what you hear news. I am a law enforcement supplier for their guns, clothing, gear, accessories and so on and for many agencies. So I hear alot more of what's going on than most. But by sticking your head in the sand and thinking that the govt. is looking out for your best interest is not a good call on your behalf. It would be like someone saying we can't have a black president. Who cares what color his or hers skin is? It shouldn't matter as long as they can do the task at hand. But think of how many ignorant people out there said it would never happen. Life is full of surprises and you never know what's around the corner. Don't get me wrong. I think it is great that we have achieved something that most thought was impossible. But I am not happy with some of the things that are going to be a result because of it. So if you want to keep your head in the sand brother and think the govt. is on your side, more power to you my man. I just hope you don't end up being a statistic [/quote']

 

I absolutely agree that all americans should have the right to bear arms, just as our fore fathers envisioned. We just need to remember what they envisioned. They certainly weren't thinking about 357's, Saturday Night Specials or assault weapons.

 

[180Bob]

He can appoint Supreme Court Judges that can do it though.

 

The process to amend the constitution of the United States is:

 

There are essentially two ways spelled out in the Constitution for how to propose an amendment. One has never been used.

 

The first method is for a bill to pass both houses of the legislature, by a two-thirds majority in each. Once the bill has passed both houses, it goes on to the states. This is the route taken by all current amendments. Because of some long outstanding amendments, such as the 27th, Congress will normally put a time limit (typically seven years) for the bill to be approved as an amendment (for example, see the 21st and 22nd).

 

The second method prescribed is for a Constitutional Convention to be called by two-thirds of the legislatures of the States, and for that Convention to propose one or more amendments. These amendments are then sent to the states to be approved by three-fourths of the legislatures or conventions. This route has never been taken, and there is discussion in political science circles about just how such a convention would be convened, and what kind of changes it would bring about.

 

Regardless of which of the two proposal routes is taken, the amendment must be ratified, or approved, by three-fourths of states. There are two ways to do this, too. The text of the amendment may specify whether the bill must be passed by the state legislatures or by a state convention. See the Ratification Convention Page for a discussion of the make up of a convention. Amendments are sent to the legislatures of the states by default. Only one amendment, the 21st, specified a convention. In any case, passage by the legislature or convention is by simple majority.

 

The Constitution, then, spells out four paths for an amendment:

 

* Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state conventions

* Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state legislatures

* Proposal by Congress, ratification by state conventions

* Proposal by Congress, ratification by state legislatures

 

What you will notice is that neither the President nor the Supreme Court plays any role in this amendment process.

[downhill_biker]

Who's vote didnt count? I don't understand? Later Ryan

 

ex 1:

as i said before, if you have 90k to 10k and 3 electorals, they will most likely go with the majority, and you get a 3:0 vote, the 10k didnt get their voices heard.

 

ex 2:

once 170 electorals are reached its over. here in oregon, we were one of the last, so our vote didn't count because it was already over 170. if popular vote, they would have to tally and count until each person's vote was figured.

[downhill_biker]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWZHTJsR4Bc

 

People who thought Palin was a good choice should check this out... lmfao.

 

Here is another good video. Not Palin, but shows how much people actually know about the world we live in and where countries are.

 

[mrgreenthumb]

The process to amend the constitution of the United States is:

 

There are essentially two ways spelled out in the Constitution for how to propose an amendment. One has never been used.

 

The first method is for a bill to pass both houses of the legislature, by a two-thirds majority in each. Once the bill has passed both houses, it goes on to the states. This is the route taken by all current amendments. Because of some long outstanding amendments, such as the 27th, Congress will normally put a time limit (typically seven years) for the bill to be approved as an amendment (for example, see the 21st and 22nd).

 

The second method prescribed is for a Constitutional Convention to be called by two-thirds of the legislatures of the States, and for that Convention to propose one or more amendments. These amendments are then sent to the states to be approved by three-fourths of the legislatures or conventions. This route has never been taken, and there is discussion in political science circles about just how such a convention would be convened, and what kind of changes it would bring about.

 

Regardless of which of the two proposal routes is taken, the amendment must be ratified, or approved, by three-fourths of states. There are two ways to do this, too. The text of the amendment may specify whether the bill must be passed by the state legislatures or by a state convention. See the Ratification Convention Page for a discussion of the make up of a convention. Amendments are sent to the legislatures of the states by default. Only one amendment, the 21st, specified a convention. In any case, passage by the legislature or convention is by simple majority.

 

The Constitution, then, spells out four paths for an amendment:

 

* Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state conventions

* Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state legislatures

* Proposal by Congress, ratification by state conventions

* Proposal by Congress, ratification by state legislatures

 

What you will notice is that neither the President nor the Supreme Court plays any role in this amendment process.

 

Wow thats some great info thanks 180bob!! Looks like we won't be loosing our guns after all guys!!!! YAY OBAMA!!!!(clap)(clap)

[SULLY]

Here is a little more reading for you guys. As much as I would like to agree with Bob, I can't. Right now there are individual states that play by their own set of rules when it comes to firearms. California is by far the worst. And not to mention that Washington DC citizens just GOT BACK some of their 2nd rights. For those of you that think the govt. has to play by the rules that were set back years ago and all of your rights and freedoms are safe, I feel sorry for you. You might think I am some gun toting nutcase. But I rather keep my options open instead of banking on the govt. to have my back. Also this is not an attack on the new guy. There are alot of people in all stages of the govt. that have no problem backing him when it comes to the firearm issues. So I am not saying it is all going to be his fault. But it will be a very large group that he leads down that path. In fact Biden hates the firearms industry more than Obama does. Not to mention Hillary Clinton and her beloved Brady Bill back in 1994. I sincerely hope that I am wrong. But unfortunately the facts are what they are. It's just a question of how hard they are going to push (nono)

 

CHICAGO, Oct. 15 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following is the text

of an open letter to the nation's hunters and sportsmen issued today by

Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson:

 

Fellow Sportsman,

 

Hello, my name is Rich Pearson and I have been active in the firearm

rights movement for over 40 years. For the past 15 years, I have served in

the Illinois state capitol as the chief lobbyist for the Illinois State

Rifle Association.

 

I lobbied Barack Obama extensively while he was an Illinois State

Senator. As a result of that experience, I know Obama's attitudes toward

guns and gun owners better than anyone. The truth be told, in all my years

in the Capitol I have never met a legislator who harbors more contempt for

the law-abiding firearm owner than does Barack Obama.

 

Although Obama claims to be an advocate for the 2nd Amendment, his

voting record in the Illinois Senate paints a very different picture. While

a state senator, Obama voted for a bill that would ban nearly every hunting

rifle, shotgun and target rifle owned by Illinois citizens. That same bill

would authorize the state police to raid homes of gun owners to forcibly

confiscate banned guns. Obama supported a bill that would shut down

law-abiding firearm manufacturers including Springfield Armory, Armalite,

Rock River Arms and Les Baer. Obama also voted for a bill that would

prohibit law-abiding citizens from purchasing more than one gun per month.

 

Without a doubt, Barack Obama has proven himself to be an enemy of the

law abiding firearm owner. At the same time, Obama has proven himself to be

a friend to the hardened criminal. While a state senator, Obama voted 4

times against legislation that would allow a homeowner to use a firearm in

defense of home and family.

 

Does Barack Obama still sound to you like a "friend" of the law-abiding

gun owner?

 

And speaking of friends, you can always tell a person by the company

they keep. Obama counts among his friends the Rev. Michael Pfleger - a

renegade Chicago priest who has openly called for the murder of gun shop

owners and pro-gun legislators. Then there is his buddy Richard Daley, the

mayor of Chicago who has declared that if it were up to him, nobody would

be allowed to own a gun. And let's not forget Obama's pal George Soros -

the guy who has pumped millions of dollars into the UN's international

effort to disarm law-abiding citizens.

 

Obama has shown that he is more than willing to use other people's

money to fund his campaign to take your guns away from you. While a board

member of the leftist Joyce Foundation, Barack Obama wrote checks for tens

of millions of dollars to extremist gun control organizations such as the

Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence and the Violence Policy Center.

 

Does Barack Obama still sound to you like a "friend" of the law-abiding

gun owner?

 

By now, I'm sure that many of you have received mailings from an

organization called "American Hunters and Shooters Association(AHSA)"

talking about what a swell fellow Obama is and how he honors the 2nd

Amendment and how you will never have to worry about Obama coming to take

your guns. Let me make it perfectly clear - everything the AHSA says about

Obama is pure hogwash. The AHSA is headed by a group of left-wing elitists

who subscribe to the British view of hunting and shooting. That is, a state

of affairs where hunting and shooting are reserved for the wealthy

upper-crust who can afford guided hunts on exclusive private reserves. The

AHSA is not your friend, never will be.

 

In closing, I'd like to remind you that I'm a guy who has actually gone

nose to nose with Obama on gun rights issues. The Obama I know cannot even

begin to identify with this nation's outdoor traditions. The Obama I know

sees you, the law abiding gun owner, as nothing but a low-class lummox who

is easily swayed by the flash of a smile and a ration of rosy rhetoric. The

Obama I know is a stony-faced liar who has honed his skill at getting what

he wants - so long as people are willing to give it to him.

[mrgreenthumb]

WOW i can see why you would be upset if you believe most of that CRAP and HEARSAY. OK so i'm sure he did vote against those things, but was all the rest of the bs really necessary or even true? Sounds like someone is hanging out in the firearms companies pockets!!!! What from that is actually based on fact? A letter from Richard Pearson, regarding past issues, is by no means proof of whats to come. They never have taken away our right to bear arms nor will they end of story. If they want to regulate it a little more and make it a little harder if not impoissible to get certain guns fine go for it, i don't think that your going to need an ak47 or glock 45 or a desert eagle 50 cal or an ar15 with armor piercing ammo to take down the person breaking into your house. Shoot a 22cal rifle would be more than enough to take anyone down!!!! As long as i can own a gun i am happy, and as bob pointed out, they are not able to ammend the constitution without a majority vote, which simply WONT happen.

[Twitterbait]

Let me be clear, while i did vote mccain, i don't really like either of the options this year. but m logic and hope was thus:

 

if mccain won he would not have had a republican congress so he and congress would cancel each other out and nothing but the most important legislation would make it through.

 

instead we have Obama and who knows what he is planning. I don't see how he is going to do half of the stuff he promised without doubling the national debt. now he has a free ticket. the only hope we have is that his lack of experience with the system will keep him from doing too much damage.

 

i still get the feeling that in the end he is going to be a puppet and nothing more. and that is the scariest thought of all...

Obama = Pelosi's **tch

[andy]

8 years of Bush backed up by 6 years of Republican House and Senate have given us the largest national debt in history, with absolutely NOTHING to show for it aside from larger government. The whole "Democrats will spend us into oblivion" argument would hold a lot more water if the Republicans had actually been behaving like Conservatives. The real irony of this whole situation is that the Democrats are now truer to Conservative principles than the Republicans.

[Lowman]

If I were in a position to call for it, I would call for the head of George Bush and Dick Cheney. They are guilty of perjury, murder, racketeering, black mail, war crimes, crimes against humanity and more. It just blows me away that people were voting for more of the same from the Republican party. McCain was the second coming of the Bush family, another puppet.

 

How many innocent people have died from the Bush administration's lies about WMD's in Iraq? Who are we to overthrow a sovern nation? Why are we still there?

 

I can't believe that we are really arguing about gun rights here when our country is in such peril. We have no jobs, they have all been farmed out to the 3rd world, our major corporations are closing, our young men and women are dying.

 

What is the real legacy of the Bush administration? Ask Cindy Sheehan and the thousands of other families who have lost loved ones in the useless war. Should George Bush and key members of his organization be held accountable? I say, HELL YES. We are the biggest terrorists in the world. We just are so righteous that we refuse to be told that. Thow the bastards out on the front lines, let their kids go over there and see what is is like to ride in a Humvee with no armour protecting it.

 

How do we fix what is wrong with things in our country? I think we have taken the first step in doing so by getting the failed policy makers out of Washington, and letting cooler heads prevail. We have a LONG way to go to get back on our feet.

 

Thank you for listening